01 — Document automation
Document automation at CoderConda costs €895 one-off for the first document type and €495 for each further one; every document then comes from a template that carries its version. A copy does not say which version it was written under.
Template · inspection report5 versions
Valid: version 01 · threshold 2.5 barValid: version 02 · threshold 2.5 barValid: version 03 · threshold 2.4 barValid: version 04 · threshold 2.4 barValid: version 05 · threshold 2.2 bar
5 versions, Valid: version 01 · threshold 2.5 bar
02 — The versions
01 — The first
One template in a folder, kept by the person who wrote it. The threshold sits in the paragraph, the interval below it, and whoever needs a report opens the file. As long as one person keeps it and everybody opens the same one, this works.
8 monthsCreated, kept by one person
Two conditions, and both hold for about a year.
02 — The required field
The serial number becomes mandatory, because without it nobody can tell which device was inspected. What gets changed is the template that happens to be open. The other two stay as they are, and nobody notices, because both still produce a report that looks complete.
6 monthsSerial number becomes required
A document with a plausible gap is more dangerous than one with an open gap.
03 — The threshold
A standard changes, the threshold drops by a tenth. This is the first change where opening the right file is no longer enough: a report from this period can only be judged if it states which value it was measured against.
7 monthsThreshold from 2.5 to 2.4 bar
From here it is not the reading that decides, but the pair of reading and version.
04 — The interval
The interval halves. Everything inspected after this follows the new cadence, everything before it the old one, and asserting both at once is not a contradiction but the normal case. An archive that cannot separate the two turns every change into a round of rework.
5 monthsInterval from 24 to 12 months
A change takes effect from the next document, not retroactively.
05 — Today’s
The threshold drops a second time. So a reading that passed a year ago now sits outside it, and the question asked in every audit is not whether the document is correct, but which version it was written under.
4 monthsThreshold from 2.4 to 2.2 bar
The old version is not deleted. It just cannot be chosen any more.
Template · inspection report5 versions
Valid: version 01 · threshold 2.5 barValid: version 02 · threshold 2.5 barValid: version 03 · threshold 2.4 barValid: version 04 · threshold 2.4 barValid: version 05 · threshold 2.2 bar
5 versions, Valid: version 01 · threshold 2.5 bar
03 — The cut-off
Three years later somebody asks about a report from August 2025. The reading sits below the threshold that applied then and above the one that applies now. Both statements are true, and which one is meant is decided not by the value but by the date beside it.
Template · inspection report5 versions
Valid: version 01 · threshold 2.5 barValid: version 02 · threshold 2.5 barValid: version 03 · threshold 2.4 barValid: version 04 · threshold 2.4 barValid: version 05 · threshold 2.2 bar
5 versions, Valid: version 03 · threshold 2.4 bar
Folder of copies
No answer
The file carries no date of validity, only one of its last save.
Generated document
Version 03
Number, date, version and the source of every value sit in the metadata.
The rule
A document that does not know its version is not wrong. It is unprovable, and that only shows up when somebody outside the company reads it.
So what is managed here is not the template but its validity.
04 — The evidence
A case shows that it works; it does not show what gets asked afterwards. So two things stand here: a project from the register and the answer a generated document can give three years later. One line in it stayed empty.
What it does not proveWhat it proves is consistency, not an answer years later: the project is from this year and has not been audited yet. The same project appears on the process automation page, there for the turnaround rather than for consistency.
The case study · KI-Exposé-Generator (2026)The evidence on this site
Version record 2025-0884Inspection report Kessel 3
The empty lineThe serial number was not captured on site. It stays empty instead of plausibly filled, and that is exactly what makes the gap visible later.
05 — The price
A price that does not say since when it applies has the same problem as a template without a version. So it stands here the way this page issues a document: with a number, a validity and the line before it. The line before it is the price that applied earlier. All prices are final prices. No VAT is charged under § 19 UStG.
Versions of this price
The unitOne document type. Not one document, not one user, not one run.
06 — The archive
What a document is worth is decided on the day somebody asks for it. Until then it merely sits somewhere. These four points are the difference between sitting and being findable, and every one of them has been tested once, not merely set up once.
What the archive can do4
07 — The objections
Four sentences I expect in a first conversation about templates, and I have said two of them myself. The answers stand on the right, on the same axis as the versions above.
“But we work in Word.”
Editor staysA register is addedNothing to relearn
That stays. Word is a good editor and a bad register. What is added here is not a different program but the validity beside the file.
“We need that twice a year.”
Volume or liabilityOtherwise a noTwo routes
Then it does not pay off, and I will say so. The effort pays through volume or through liability, never through a good feeling.
“The clauses come from lawyers.”
Once, not fourfoldThe reviewed stateValid from
Precisely why. A clause maintained by four people in four copies is no longer the one that was reviewed. Broken out, it exists once, with a validity.
“And the documents from before?”
No backdatingFiling and searchProvable from now
Those get no version any more, because one cannot be invented after the fact. They are filed and made searchable, and honestly nothing more.
The long answers
The argument is almost never about writing, it is about finding again. Somebody drafting a contract wants an editor, and Word is fine for that. What Word cannot do is say which version of a clause applied on a given day, because a file only knows when it was saved. The breakdown changes nothing about the editor: fixed paragraphs stay text, interchangeable clauses get a validity, calculated fields come from the system. Anyone who goes on writing in Word goes on writing in Word, just on the template rather than on the copy.
There are exactly two reasons to break a template apart. The first is volume: writing twenty reports a month saves minutes each, and that adds up. The second is liability: signing two contracts a year that could turn into a dispute in five years means needing the version answer even when the volume is small. If neither applies, a well-kept folder is the right solution, and that is not a polite refusal but the cheaper route. I would rather say so in the first conversation than in the third.
A reviewed clause is a state, not a text. The moment it sits in four files there are four states, and exactly one of them was reviewed. Nobody notices while nobody compares, and comparison only happens in a dispute. The breakdown reverses this: the clause lives in one place, gets a validity when it is put in, and takes effect from the next document. Changing it means changing it once, and every earlier document keeps the version it was made under. That is not legal work; it is the precondition for legal work still holding years later.
The wish makes sense and the answer is uncomfortable. A document from 2023 carries no record of which copy it came from, and adding that afterwards would mean inventing it. What is possible: move the old stock into the same archive, make it searchable by content and attach what can actually be established: date, type, asset, client. Whatever is missing stays visibly empty, exactly like the serial number in section 04. From the first generated document the answer is complete, and the break between the two is dated rather than blurred.
08 — Appointment
Pick a time that suits you straight from the calendar. I go through with you where your company stands and what is worth doing. No obligation and no sales pressure.
The calendar is hosted by cal.com.
Loading it opens a connection from your browser to cal.com (USA), which transmits your IP address; cal.com may set cookies when it loads. You can also go straight there instead.
